Papers of John Adams, volume 20
th1789
By the last post I was favoured with yours of the twenty first of
May: Mr Duncan I presume has not come on—neither by his
letter or your own am I made acquainted with his Views or the Object of his Wishes— I
can only say to him as to all others, that his application must be made to the President
and it ought to in writing1 Your
testimony in his favr will have weight— I thank you Sir for
your blessing—your reason for not writing me, is not a good one—for although I have no
spare moments Yet if I had any, should not judge them the proper moments to read or to
answer Your Letters— I should devote hours of Buisness and of Pleasure to that service—
I have no kind of animosity or antipathy to the Gentleman whose name you mention:2 but I know of no merits or pretensions
that he has, which can give him hopes of interfering with your Claims to an Employment
long possessed hardly earned, and faithfully executed— I find the personal service which
my Office renders indispensable somewhat severe— Setting still in the same place, so
many hours of every day, and attending to the Course of proceedings in every step, as it
is some thing new to me is somewhat injurious to my health: 3 but I hope to get the better of this inconvenience and when habit shall be formed, to
find it pleasant; there is in the Senate much more of a National Spirit than you and I
have been accustomed to see in Congress and much more apparent Moderation—3 I wish the Motions of both Houses could be
accelerated: but in untried Paths so many Obstructions occur, that time and Patience
alone can cure them— I wish to know the spirit of the new Govt in Massachusetts: and am not without hopes it will be sufficiently National: I
dont say federal for I think that an improper Word—
I am my dear Sir / Yr sincre Friend & servant
LbC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Mr Lovell—
Boston—”; APM Reel 115.
For Lovell’s letter of 21 May recommending Robert Duncan for a federal post and JA’s subsequent advice, see vol. 19:426–427.
Lovell was engaged in a bitter public rivalry with Gen. Benjamin Lincoln, then lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, to obtain the Boston and Charlestown collectorship that ended in Lovell’s defeat (vol. 19:412).
Throughout the spring and summer of 1789, members of Congress
struggled with their primary task of straightening out the economy. They laid down
ways to ensure income, establish credit, and address the states’ wartime debt while
acting within the Constitution’s scope. Four bills, all passed by early August, formed
the core of the revenue plan: the Tariff Act, the Tonnage Act, the Collection Act, and
the Coasting Act. The first pair of laws raised money by implementing a 5 percent duty
on imports and established credit by upholding foreign treaties. The next two pieces
of legislation enforced the revenue system by organizing regional districts, outlining
federal record-keeping methods, drafting inspection standards, and constructing
lighthouses. In contrast to the weak economic framework of the Articles of
Confederation, the new federal legislation provided a viable infrastructure for
raising revenue. There was no direct tax levied on individuals, and no excise tax set
on domestic liquor. For a more expansive view of the debates, readers should turn to
First
Fed. Cong.
, vols. 1, 2, 3, 10, 11.
th:1789.
I find you, & I must agree, NOT to disagree, or we
must cease to discuss political questions. I could as soon believe that the British
parliament, never had once a right to tax America,
as believe that a fourth major part of the citizens
of New york were federal, or that many of the federal
minority were so, from proper motives.— I know from good authority that some of the
leading federalists of new york pressed the Senate at albany to relinquish the power of
appointing federal senators, to the assembly, rather than risk the loss of the residence
of Congress in new york.1 But my
principal Objection to the continuance in new York, is the influence which a city
contaminated by having been for seven years a garrison town to a corrupted British Army,
must have Upon the manners, & morals of those men who 4 are to form the character of our Country. I already see
the effects of this influence, and hear much more of it.—
The citizens of Pennsylvania are truly republican; and will not readily concur in a
government which has begun so soon to ape the corruptions of the British Court, conveyed
to it, thro’ the impure channel of the city of new york. I think Philada: the most eligible Spot in the Union for the present
residence of Congress— Upon this Account, I am sure it will not be preferred,— But
Trenton—Annapolis—Chester town—or the Banks of the Ohio should all be prefer’d to New
york.— It is the sink of British manners & politicks. I
hope one of the last mentioned places will be fixed upon soon, otherwise such factions
will I fear arise, as will convulse our government. There is more known—said & felt upon this subject that is proper to be communicated, or
than will be believed while Congress is perfumed with British incense in new york.
When I speak of the influence of the
New Engd: States, I mean that influence in favor of
Virtue—order, & liberty which has long been a System
with them, but which is only felt, by fitts & starts by most of the Other States. I
wish to see such an influence revived, & perpetual in our Country, & to ensure
this, I wish it not to be perceived, or opposed.
When I expressed a wish for a Union in Principle & conduct of
massachussets—Virginia—& Pennsya:—I wished only for the
predominance of numbers & property in the legislative
& executive parts of our government.2
I highly respect Mr Jay, but supposed,
he would have been continued in his present office.—3 After stating the Abilities—Sacrifices &
services of Mr Wilson—could it be offensive to hear that he
was your friend, p[. . .] opposed the
narrow Views of those people who wished to so render your election abortive? or to
dishonour you by the manner in which it was conducted?— In this he acted a manly part,
and I have a right to say, that he was less influenced by personal regard, than by
genuine—federal—and republican principles.— Letters from new
York & maryland (which I saw) strongly urged him to an opposite Conduct. But
he felt—what you have expressed, and could his advice have prevailed fully, you would have had ten, instead of eight
Votes from Pennsylvania.—4
Why should we accelerate the progress of our Government towards
monarchy?— Every part of the conduct of the americans tends to it. we will have but one deliverer—One great—or one good 5 man in our Country.
For my part, I cannot help ascribing the independance—& new government of our
Country to thousands—all equally necessary & equally useful in both those great
events.
This is not a time to mention nor are you in the proper place to hear, who were unfriendly to your election, in new york.
That you may never mistake any of my Opinions or principles in my
future letters, I shall add to this long One,—that I am as much a republican as I was in
1775—& 6—that I consider heriditary monarchy &
aristocracy as rebellion against nature—that I abhor titles, & every thing that
belongs to the peagantry of government—that I love the people—but would sooner be banished to Iceland or Tobalski,
than gain their favor by accommodating to one of their unjust popular prejudices,—that I
feel a respect for my rulers bordering upon homage, but
that I would not be jolted two hours in the Stage that plies between new york &
Philada: to be the prime minister of the United
States,—& that I have applied for no office, & shall apply for none. Under all
circumstances, I hope I shall be excused in thinking for
myself, at all times, & upon all subjects.— To this detail of my principles, I have only to add one feeling, and that is, that I am with as much Affection & respect as I was in
1775—(notwithstanding our present contrariety of sentiment upon some subjects) your
sincere friend, and / humble / Servant
n:Rush
RC (Adams Papers).
Fractured by a largely Federalist senate and an Antifederalist-dominated assembly, the New York legislature struggled to choose federal members of Congress, ultimately sending representatives in April and July (vol. 19:314, 390–391).
Rush was resuming his argument that given Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia’s joint support of JA for vice president, the three states would guide the choice of federal seat and the distribution of federal posts. JA was less convinced of their influence, writing: “Nor do I think that this Circumstance ought to have any Weight in Elections or appointments” (vol. 19:401, 460).
With an eye on nominating heads of the new treasury, state, and
justice departments, George Washington met with John Jay in early August and “had some
conversation . . . respecting his views to Office.” Although he was
well-suited to continue as acting secretary of state, Jay informed the president that
he was more interested in serving as the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme
Court, a choice strongly supported by JA (Washington, Papers, Presidential
Series
, 3:405; Stahr, John Jay
, p. 271–272).
According to Rush, James Wilson, a leading Federalist and
Pennsylvania elector, intended for all ten of the state’s electoral votes to go to
JA in the 1789 presidential election. Wilson received at least two
letters, one of 19 Jan. from former loyalist Rev. William Smith of Chester, Md., and
another of 25 Jan. from Alexander Hamilton of New York, both swaying him to steer
votes away from JA in order to ensure Washington’s victory. The state’s
final vote count was 10 for Washington, 7 for JA, and 3 for various other
candidates (vols. 3:56, 19:424;
First Fed. Elections
,
1:384; Israel W. Morris, “Letters of Hon. Alexander Hamilton and Rev. William Smith,
D.D., to Hon. James Wilson, 1789,”
PMHB
, 29:210–215 [1905]).